Selenium HQ Reviews

I've done headless execution and at times I've found that pretty useful.

The solution is stable.

It's a scalable product.

There's documentation that can help with the setup.

It's not too complicated to implement. 

The product is easy to use.

The pricing is great. 

The reporting part can be better. They need some APIs or maybe in-built libraries for reporting. At times, it's difficult to locate elements on certain applications on the web. Locating the elements, like web tables, becomes a little difficult sometimes. They can improve that feature also.

I've been using the solution for eight to ten years. 

The stability is good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is good. It's reliable. 

Companies can scale it to a certain extent, yes. However, if I have to do execution on Selenium grid or something like that, therefore, it's pretty scalable.

There are a lot of people using the product. I'm not sure about the number, however, it's likely around 500 people.

I know that there is some technical support available, however, I've never contacted them. By going on the web, on stack overflow, I've pretty much been able to find a solution if we've had questions or issues. I've never contacted technical support.

I've also worked with Micro Focus. 

I'm working with Micro Focus, however, for that part, I'm working on the mainframe - although I've done some web testing using Micro Focus on a website. Otherwise, I found Selenium to be easier, and simpler to use than Micro Focus when it comes to the web. A lot of support online is available. A lot of forums, and communities are there. For Micro Focus, the part where you identify objects on a webpage, that part is pretty simple on Selenium. You can use XPath or CSS or IDE or anything, and it works fine. Yet with Micro Focus, the web part, I found it a little tedious to work with. Selenium is much easier in that sense on the web part.

It's an internal website that we work on.

The setup is pretty simple.

We do not really require some technical person for the maintenance of Selenium HQ. That said, sometimes, due to certain issues, like dependency on certain versions, you have to change the entry in your pom file. Otherwise, certain open-source things don't work well with the latest version of Selenium. The backward compatibility for certain other open-source software and APIs don't work well with the latest version of Selenium. You have to have little backward compatibility also. Other than that, I found it was pretty stable with almost all the other open-source software. It didn't require constant watching.

We did not need the help of a consultant or integrator. By reading some help files on the internet, we could set it up pretty easily. That's not a problem.

We have an enterprise license. The pricing is good. I'd rate it at a four out of five in terms of affordability. 

I'm just a consumer or end-user. 

We deploy on the cloud and on Jira as well.

I'm working on the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten. If they fixed the reporting functionality, I'd rate it higher. 

We don't directly use Selenium. We have built a wrapper around Selenium so other teams can consume it.

We are using version 4.0.1. We run it on a Microsoft public cloud in the CI/CD server.

There are around four teams which are currently using this solution, and we have a target of having around 10 teams.

It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium. It has a wider community. If there are issues, you can look around online and find a good solution.

Selenium is in continuous development. They release very stable versions. Those are the key points which helped us pick Selenium over other tools.

There are a few things we have to actually design and plan when we are building the automation. There are new tools which handle it by themselves, but that is a give and take when you actually use or choose a tool. 

Shadow DOM could be improved and the handling of single page applications. Right now, it's a bit complicated and there are a lot of additional scripts required if you want to handle a single page application in a neat way.

With these technologies, at times you have a lot of callbacks. Those aren't handled very well with Selenium. At some point of time, suppose you have entered something and the button needs to be enabled. Now, in normal terms, it seems to be a client side action, so if you enter something on the client side, JavaScript is running. It'll say, "Value is this, so I'll enable the button."

With this technology, if you enter something, it will go back to the server, get some value, and then it will enable the button. At some point of time, your project's delayed, and there is a callback happening in the background. It will not try to understand that, and it may just timeout.

I have been using this solution for about eight years.

I think it has stabilized a lot, but it's not the best tool in the market. It has a lot of room for improvement, but it has a very big community.

It is certainly scalable. It depends on how you want to use it. You can use it over a grid with multiple office machines, or you can run it standalone.

We have never used technical support because there is normally good content on the internet.

We evaluated other options but chose Selenium because of the skill sets in the market. If you use other solutions, the challenge is that if a person leaves, you won't get a second person or third person. Replacements are very difficult to come by if you are using different solutions.

It's actually complex. It's not really straightforward, but it depends on what you're actually building for your organization. We have built a wrapper around it for other teams that are actually consuming it.

Initially, you build a solution around it, which is a challenge. If you are trying to build a standalone automation with Selenium, it will be a challenge.

There isn't a set deployment. If a team wants to use it, they can start using it from day one.

It's open-source, so it's free.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. 

Learning is easy. Implementation is not as easy, but it is still better than other tools in the market right now. I'm giving it an eight because there are a lot of things Selenium is not supporting. The rest of technology is changing, but they are not changing along with it. Normally, if we are writing a complex test, we have to do a lot of workarounds, which isn't good when we are writing scripts.

I think it's very easy to screw up with Selenium if you're using it for the first time. If you are getting it for a large organization or large project, it makes sense to have some professional help.

Depending upon the functionality, I use Selenium to prepare the scenarios I'm doing. I start by writing automation scripts in Java. From there, we execute the scripts if there are any changes in the product. Then we upgrade this overnight along with Jenkins to make sure our application is running as expected. They feature continuous deployment and continuous integration with the help of our teams, so our product will be applied to more users once it's adequately tested.

Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop. And if I build some framework on Selenium, I can give it to someone else. Then they can use it and start going further. One more thing is that you can implement any framework on it, like TestNG, Cucumber, JUnit, etc.

Selenium should implement more islands for a desktop feature. My laptop and desktop have a calibrator or some other desktop applications. We can automate those things through Selenium, so they should be adding them in the subsequent versions. For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion. 

I've been using Selenium HQ for about five years.

So performance-wise, Selenium is the best tool so far. It has the fastest automating tools.

We run scenarios at midnight or around that time and split this application into virtual machines. So during that time, the application is executed in panel mode. Let's say I have 10 vital missions in the Google Cloud Platform. These things will be triggered automatically and executed in each of the machines. And it has a balancing load concept, so if one machine is at capacity, it will automatically move to a second machine for the other scenarios. So there is never an issue with scalability. We have more than 1,000 employees in the company using it every day to develop scripts. 

Because Selenium HQ is open source, we don't have a customer service team or technical support, so we have to search on our own for answers. When I've had problems in the past,I've had to Google to see if it's an application issue or a Selenium issue. Without any help from vendors, it's difficult to automate some things like CAPTCHA. But still, we have a framework that is ready for this. So with the help of this framework and importing those library files, we can make our own way. 

At my previous company, we used a UFT tool called Micro Focus UFT. We used this because it was a different kind of use case where we had to transfer our publications back and forth between the mainframe and the mobile application. So we have to format that, which is why we used the UFT.

Setting up SeleniumHQ isn't that complex. We like to develop our application in Pega and have a point cloud that we deploy on Google Cloud. It is developed and tested with Jenkins, which is a continuous integration tool. Once the code is specific to Jenkins, we trigger Selenium and execute the scenarios. After this finishes, we move everything to cloud. 

Along with this docker, there is a deployment phase in Google Cloud, where the images of our application are moved to pre-production. Pre-production is something like a replica of production that allows the users to work on it. So once it is transferred to pre-production, the users will work for one week or one or two. If they are satisfied, we move on to production.

Deployment usually requires about eight to ten people. Most of the work is done by technicians who are akin to database administrators. They take this on for one month a year every year. Their job is mostly to minimize the weight of the application. In the next phase, DevOps engineers deploy the enviornment. The time for deployment depends on the teams and the tasks. If there is a small change, it may have taken between half an hour and an hour. On the other hand, if there is a significant upgrade of the application, it may take eight to ten hours. Generally, we don't need any maintenance unless a UR application has changed.

Selenium is free. Anyone can use it without paying anything.

I rate SeleniumHQ seven out of 10. When you're choosing a solution, it depends upon the type of applications you are using in your project. If you have only have desktop and mobile, go for Selenium. However, if you have multiple applications like Windows-based applications, a virtual machine-based application, or a mainframe .NET application, I suggest going with another tool, like Tosca UFT.

We are using Selenium for web test automation.

We are saving time with regression testing by using test automation.  

Selenium is also open source, so now we are integrating all our automation tests into the full pipeline. 

Selenium is very famous. Due to its popularity, you can find pretty much any answer in open discussions from the community. This is the power of Selenium. Whatever you need, whatever your question, you will find an answer.

The initial setup is easy.

You can integrate the solution with pretty much anything.

It's open-source and free to use.

Maybe they could improve the record and play plugin for element detection. That would be ideal. If they could build some tools above Selenium for that, I'd find it helpful. People sometimes do not have that much technical knowledge, and having something more plug-and-play would be appealing.

We have many plans in our pipeline that still need to be implemented. Maybe we will find that we need some features that need to be integrated with Selenium, for example, for a multi-browser or for implementing many machines. We haven't fully implemented this solution yet.

The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn. You need resources and technical knowledge and have to deal with the maintenance of script changes. 

While it works well with Chrome, if you use it with other browsers, you may have issues. 

I've been using the solution for three or four years. 

We've never had any stability issues. It's reliable. The performance is good. It doesn't crash or freeze.

It is scalable. It's easy to expand. 

We have about 15 people working on the solution. 

I've never spoken to technical support per se. We tend to get help via the community if we have questions. It is quite robust and there is a lot of information about all kinds of issues publicly available. 

I have used other tools as well. Each tool has its own pros and cons. Each organization also has its own unique needs. There are budgets, resources, and other factors that would come into play as well.

The solution isn't difficult to set up. It's quite straightforward. 

I'd rate the ease of setup eight out of ten. 

I cannot recall exactly how long the deployment itself took. 

Sometimes there may be some maintenance required around upgrades. You would need to check the compatibility between the software, for example. That said, the maintenance requirements are pretty low. It's not complex to maintain the product. 

We handled the implementation ourselves, in-house. 

This is an open-source solution, which is a very positive benefit. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. It's not an out-of-the-box solution like Oracle or SAP. 

We primarily use the solution for normal regression tests.

I like most of it. It is possible to get a lot of help and find help on the internet since Selenium is so widespread and established. The documentation is great.  There is  a lot of help on websites like Stack Overflow.

It is very stable.

The product is open-source. 

We are thinking about codeless automation, like what ACCELQ offers. They could maybe release a similar product that would be a codeless product.

The initial setup was difficult. 

It would be nice to have it on the cloud, like ACCELQ. That way, we don't need to set up it ourselves and don't need hardware for that. That would also allow for many people at many subsidiaries or locations to work simultaneously with it.

I'd like the possibility of automatically checking the installed browser version and automatically downloading the Selenium driver that suits the installed browser. Otherwise, you have to download and set up it manually, and if you get a new browser version, you have to do it every time, and it's time-consuming.

We've been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

Of course, you need a lot of time to optimize your scripts so that they run stable.

This is not really scalable. 

If you consider load tests or multi-thread testing, you need very powerful hardware to start several browsers. That's why in this aspect, not very scalable if you run tests in parallel.

We just have two people leveraging the solution right now. They use it regularly, on a daily basis. 

There is a lot of documentation and general product knowledge online. We don't have direct support contact as it is an open-source solution. 

We did previously use Eggplant. It's not open-source. It's actually pretty expensive. 

One benefit of Eggplant was testing mobile apps. Also, you don't find so much information on Stack Overflow or on the internet about Eggplant; they have good support.

It was not very easy to set up. 

We needed to add a lot of plugins like TestNG and Maven. The whole configuration was not very easy. I am not sure if it is the Selenium setup or just the whole system setup.

The solution is open-source and free to use. 

I'm an end-user. 

The solution is okay, however, you need to use it together with the TestNG and with Maven and use different plugins that improve it.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

SeleniumHQ is WebDriver-related. It is a package that we can use with any language such as Java or Python.

We use Selenium for automation purposes. For example, if we need data from a website, we write code that will extract the data automatically. If there are logins or pop-ups, the code will close them, so we can extract the data. 

When we are testing a website, we use SeleniumHQ automation testing to determine if there are any bugs.  

The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate. For example, often when data is needed, someone will sit and copy and paste it. What we can do with SeleniumHQ is automate it so that the data is directly extracted from the tools and libraries that we use. This saves time and is much better than copying and pasting.

There are some tiny issues with SeleniumHQ. For example, with respect to the scraping tests. Sometimes, a website will have some hidden items or blockages that inhibit us from extracting data directly. It would be beneficial if Selenium could extract that information.

The other issue is browser-related. There are small bugs causing it to break automatically. Sometimes it will close automatically. 

I have been using SeleniumHQ for a year and a half.

Stability depends on how you write the code. If you handle all conditions, there will be some surprises. Suddenly, you will have pop-ups and other conditions. 

SeleniumHQ is scalable. Anyone can use it. We have approximately 30 users of the solution. 

Customer service and support with Selenium are good. If any bugs are found and brought to their attention, they will immediately help. They provide lots of documentation as well as answers on the internet. The technical support team, themselves, will answer questions within 24 hours.

We use Python, so the initial setup of SeleniumHQ was quick and simple. You can use any browser or tools like, Chrome, Firefox, or Edge to run the automation testing. 

We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything.

We evaluated other options. 

For mobile scraping, non-mobile scraping, or to test anything mobile there are more applications available on the internet, like Appium for Android, which is like Selenium for browsers, or TestComplete for iOS drivers. 

However, Selenium is particularly the best for browsers or PC, operating systems.

I would recommend this solution to anyone considering implementing it into their organization. Overall, I would rate SeleniumHQ an eight out of ten.

We mainly use HQ for UI automation and some of the main functions of test cases. We are customers of Selenium. 

The best thing about the product is that it is open-source and free, which is why we opted for it. It's also customizable which is great for us. There is a lot of online assistance available in forums and support on the Stack overflow. HQ is continually updated and supported by Selenium. You can write your own scripts without needing to depend on what's already there. The UI is automation friendly. When there's a slow network and an older application, the waves get very flaky and Selenium can handle that. Setting up and working with Chrome and Firefox is easy on Selenium.

The solution is intended for browser automation so it's not a support testing tool and there are no features. I'd like to see some flavors of test case management available that don't require any additions and there could be some improvement in the fluid-based area as well. Selenium is meant for developers but QA people cannot write test cases very easily on it. If you don't have a development background, it's tough. 

I've been using this solution for eight years. 

We had a few stability issues initially but it's very stable now.

The product is scalable. We have around 40 to 50 QA users in the company. 

We reported a few bugs on Selenium and they were resolved. The support was mediocre. Because it's open source there's not much support available.

The initial setup is easy but it requires certain development skills to set up. Without that, it's not easy. The difficulty is in creating a framework and that requires thinking about the maintainability and scalability aspects.

We went with Selenium for several reasons; it's open source and free, they provide a lot of support, and we can use Java technology which Selenium has available. Other tools generally don't provide perpetual licenses.

It's important to get hands-on experience with the program. I would also suggest getting your frame pyramid in order. You need to decide on the language you're going to use and have that programming language support in your organization and decide which other tools you're going to use. Also, think of your application and whether Selenium is the appropriate solution.  

This is the most widely used tool throughout the world in this space. It has so much support available and is a benchmark for other tools so I rate the solution eight out of 10.

The solution is for front-end testing. It is mainly a testing tool.

There is nothing I cannot do with Selenium. It's very good in terms of features.

The recent changes they've added have been positive. 

The back-end integration and backend web driver supports are great. We integrate with Jira Confluence, Bitbucket, and Jenkins. There is no issue at all.

It has great Dev tools.

The Chrome debugging protocol has been helpful.

We found the initial setup to be straightforward. 

The solution is stable.

It's quite scalable. 

This is an open-source solution that is free to use. 

It supports multiple languages. Many of my friends are working with Selenium with Python language. I am working in Java. People are working in Javascript also. Some people work in this Ruby, C#, et cetera. 

In my previous company, I was using Selenium in my MacBook Air. They could handle iOS with no problem or Windows. It supports different operating systems and multiple browsers. 

It's really not lacking in features at this time. 

We'd like to have more support for Windows applications. 

There's no in-built reporting available. They should work on their reporting functionality. 

I've used the solution for five and a half years. 

It's a pretty stable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is scalable. I have made many changes, and it is always scalable. It is adaptive, actually. Whatever I do on it, I can adjust. It is scalable.

We have maybe ten people using the solution right now.

We use it daily. 

Whenever we Google issues, we find it easy to find answers. 

We've found support to be good.

I've also used Appium in the past.

The solution offers a very easy initial setup. It's not overly complicated or difficult. Compared to Appium, for example, it's much easier. 

I'd rate the ease of implementation five out of five. 

The product is free to use and open-source. 

The framework and the language should be defined early if a new user plans to take this solution on long-term. It helps to have that figured out so you can implement it correctly. A few years back, I started with Java, however, given the choice, I would have preferred Python.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.